 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
blackfrancis
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 14 May 2004
Posts: 45
|
 Posted: Fri May 14, 2004 11:55 am Post subject: press about the swiftvets |
 |
|
Kerry's former colleagues in Viet Nam have come out claiming he is unfit to be Commander In Chief
NewsMax is running this story. Apparently many people who claim to have served with John Kerry in VietNam say that his behavior in combat and after he returned home makes him unfit to be President. Now, with Bush's wonderful track record from thirty years ago(drunken frat boy, anyone) you would think they would stay away from an opportunity to have this arguement turned around on them, but they don't do anything else intelligent, why should this be any different.
Now, the man who is leading this charge against Kerry is one John O'Neill. O'Neill took over the swift boat Kerry commanded after Kerry left Viet Nam, upon being awarded his third purple heart. O'Neill reached a type of fame in the 70's by heading the Viet Nam Veterans for a Just Peace, and he publicly debated John Kerry on The Dick Cavett Show. He was also handpicked by the Nixon Administration to try and nuetralize Kerry, who they viewed as a threat. O'Neill is also politically connected to Supreme Court Justice William Rehnquist and former President George HW Bush.
Lt Cmdr Grant Hibbard is also a member of the group, and he recently came out claiming Kerry did not deserve his third purple heart, claiming it was no more than a scrape. Now, I don't know if everyone is aware of this so let me enlighten you. You Do Not Request A Purple Heart. It is given, once your medical records are looked at and it is determined you were injured in combat. It doesn't matter what for, if you recieved medical attention, for any wound recieved in combat, you get a Purple Heart. Its that simple. If you are interested, a detailed account of Kerry's wounds are available here. FOX News(OMG) also reports that some of the groups members, including Hibbard and Kerry's Captain George Elliott, current statements about Kerry, contradict their own evaluations of him in wartime, and Elliott praised Kerry in 1996 for going after the enemy.
Joe Conason also reports that the people who are encouraging this group are the same as those who were behind the famous trashing of Sen. John McCain in the 2000 Republican primary, including Merrie Spaeth, who took the fall for "The Republicans for Clean Air" and was married to O'Neill's former law partner, Tex Lezar. Spaeth also gave advice to Kenneth Starr for the Clinton impeachment hearings, and the godfather of her daughter is Theodore Olsen, who was the council for the American Spectator and headed the infamous Arkansas Project, the dirty-tricks campaign used against Bill Clinton.
The alleged founder of the group is Rear Adm. Roy Hoffman, who is believed to have provoked the civilian massacre at Thanh Phong in February of 1969, after telling his officers, not to return without "enough kills". Among his officers were Medal of Honor winner Bob Kerrey, former Nebraskan senator and now a member of the 9-11 Commission.
Okay, now looking at all these facts, I think it is easy to see that this is mainly Karl Rove at work, while I do not doubt these men have a legitimate beef against Kerry for protesting the war, do you really want to let the vindictive rhetoric of men who can't move on with their lives, destroy the only chance we have at getting rid of Bush? Please, pass this information around to anyone who may let these bastards sway them away from voting for Kerry, please.
http://web.morons.org/article.jsp?id=4959 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Me#1You#10
Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 6503
|
| Posted: Fri May 14, 2004 11:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hey man, thanks for the link. There's some good stuff on that board.
Here's a couple...
| Quote: | Posted by Marinevet on May 07 2004 12:43:12 UTC
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth is comprised of more than 175 signartories. While a small number of them may have prior "political affiliations", it is absurd to suggest that the veterans, as a whole, are some sort of GOP attack group. Most of these men served in the same unit, at the same time as Kerry.Surely they have a unique perspective on the Senators service. It is wholly insensitive to question the hatered these men likely feel for Kerry. Just as it is insensitive to suggest that they"get over it" and "move on with their lives." I can only assume that anyone who would be so cavalier has never been accused of being a baby-killing, rapist, war criminal. As for the subject of his(Kerry's) Purple Hearts. It's not about "which" Purple Heart might have been fraudulant. It's a matter of weather or not he shirked his duty and used a "made up" Heart to escape service. Veterans, as a group, are not concerned that Bush didn't serve in Vietnam. To the average vet, Bush'slack of Vietnam experience simply places him in the majority. After all, there aren't very many REAL Vietnam vets. What makes us hate Kerry is his betrayal of the military men and women who did serve. Now, after slandering us, he wants to portray himself as a war hero. To veterans, this is the worst kind of hypocricy.
Posted by ET on May 07 2004 14:16:35 UTC
Day by day, the various Veterans Against Kerry groups locate one more piece of the puzzle, and one more Soldier or Sailor who was there. The following makes total and absolute sense regarding Kerry's first Purple Heart. The information is from the Brown Water Navy site. The site is by and for Vietnam Veteran River Rats, who apparently know their weapons and ordinance.
quote: This statement of the doctor supported the original testimony of the gunner's mate who was along side Kerry when it happened. The only corrections I would make, from what I have discovered and believe, to the doctor's rendition of the event was that the M-79 round was not really a "mortar" round, though almost every thing that came out of the tube of an M-79 could be colloquially called a "mortar round." It actually was an illumination round and it didn't "hit the rocks;" it exploded against the near solid wall of water pouring down in the tropical monsoon as soon as it went far enough to arm itself, about 25 feet. You see, there was no hostile force present at which to fire high explosive. This is supported by the other crewmen who denied enemy attack. It was, however, dark and Kerry was scared. So, he tried to fire an illumination round despite the warning of the gunner's mate, who told him three times not to fire the M-79 into the solid down pour. Kerry didn't listen to a mere enlisted man and the driving rain detonated the star shell as soon as it went far enough to arm. They both got hit by "shrapnel," merely small pieces of the thin casing which contained the illumination material and the parachute. Modern, backyard fireworks are more deadly. Only Kerry asks for a Purple Heart, the gunner's mate was too embarrassed.Unquote
I have checked out this information with two friends who were "In Country" Vietnam and carried the M-79. Both laughed as soon as I brought up the star shells ability to explode in a downpour, and told me that was the first thing you were taught in using M-79 "illumination rounds". One of the sailors on the Brown Water Navy site has shrapnel in his gut from forgetting that fact. Basically, it looks like Kerry FRAGGED HIMSELF !!! And then put in for a Purple Heart!!!
|
Keep those cards and letters coming Blackfrancis...and we won't even mind a little Joe Conason for a comedic interlude. It helps us to focus. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackfrancis
Seaman Recruit
Joined: 14 May 2004
Posts: 45
|
| Posted: Sat May 15, 2004 2:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Me#1You#10 wrote: | Hey man, thanks for the link. There's some good stuff on that board.
Here's a couple...
| Quote: | Posted by Marinevet on May 07 2004 12:43:12 UTC
Swift Boat Veterans for Truth is comprised of more than 175 signartories. While a small number of them may have prior "political affiliations", it is absurd to suggest that the veterans, as a whole, are some sort of GOP attack group. Most of these men served in the same unit, at the same time as Kerry.Surely they have a unique perspective on the Senators service. It is wholly insensitive to question the hatered these men likely feel for Kerry. Just as it is insensitive to suggest that they"get over it" and "move on with their lives." I can only assume that anyone who would be so cavalier has never been accused of being a baby-killing, rapist, war criminal. As for the subject of his(Kerry's) Purple Hearts. It's not about "which" Purple Heart might have been fraudulant. It's a matter of weather or not he shirked his duty and used a "made up" Heart to escape service. Veterans, as a group, are not concerned that Bush didn't serve in Vietnam. To the average vet, Bush'slack of Vietnam experience simply places him in the majority. After all, there aren't very many REAL Vietnam vets. What makes us hate Kerry is his betrayal of the military men and women who did serve. Now, after slandering us, he wants to portray himself as a war hero. To veterans, this is the worst kind of hypocricy.
Posted by ET on May 07 2004 14:16:35 UTC
Day by day, the various Veterans Against Kerry groups locate one more piece of the puzzle, and one more Soldier or Sailor who was there. The following makes total and absolute sense regarding Kerry's first Purple Heart. The information is from the Brown Water Navy site. The site is by and for Vietnam Veteran River Rats, who apparently know their weapons and ordinance.
quote: This statement of the doctor supported the original testimony of the gunner's mate who was along side Kerry when it happened. The only corrections I would make, from what I have discovered and believe, to the doctor's rendition of the event was that the M-79 round was not really a "mortar" round, though almost every thing that came out of the tube of an M-79 could be colloquially called a "mortar round." It actually was an illumination round and it didn't "hit the rocks;" it exploded against the near solid wall of water pouring down in the tropical monsoon as soon as it went far enough to arm itself, about 25 feet. You see, there was no hostile force present at which to fire high explosive. This is supported by the other crewmen who denied enemy attack. It was, however, dark and Kerry was scared. So, he tried to fire an illumination round despite the warning of the gunner's mate, who told him three times not to fire the M-79 into the solid down pour. Kerry didn't listen to a mere enlisted man and the driving rain detonated the star shell as soon as it went far enough to arm. They both got hit by "shrapnel," merely small pieces of the thin casing which contained the illumination material and the parachute. Modern, backyard fireworks are more deadly. Only Kerry asks for a Purple Heart, the gunner's mate was too embarrassed.Unquote
I have checked out this information with two friends who were "In Country" Vietnam and carried the M-79. Both laughed as soon as I brought up the star shells ability to explode in a downpour, and told me that was the first thing you were taught in using M-79 "illumination rounds". One of the sailors on the Brown Water Navy site has shrapnel in his gut from forgetting that fact. Basically, it looks like Kerry FRAGGED HIMSELF !!! And then put in for a Purple Heart!!!
|
Keep those cards and letters coming Blackfrancis...and we won't even mind a little Joe Conason for a comedic interlude. It helps us to focus. |
no problem. one question- who is funding this "grassroots movement?" I have looked around and have not been able to find anything. I'd love to see a financial disclosure to see where the money is really coming from. Then I can decide for myself what this group is really about, instead of trying to figure out the conflicting goals and mission of this group.
more for you to read:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200405050004
FOX exposed anti-Kerry vets' flip-flopping
As part of ongoing efforts to undermine Senator John Kerry's war record, the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a group founded to discredit Kerry's record during and after his service in Vietnam, held its first news conference on May 4. Also on that day, Media Matters for America released a report on the group's founder, John O'Neill -- also one of Kerry's strongest critics; the report documents O'Neill's participation in Republican efforts to smear Kerry dating back to the Nixon administration. The scrutiny that cable networks directed toward Kerry's critics throughout the day varied significantly; FOX News Channel provided in-depth coverage, including revealing that some of Kerry's present-day critics have, in the past, actually praised Kerry for his Vietnam service.
In many of the May 4 cable news reports, the partisan political backgrounds of the Swift Boat Vets were mentioned. CNN's afternoon news program, Live From..., described the group only as "Vietnam vets who formed a special purpose political action committee" and did not note O'Neill's or any other member's political affiliation. Later in the day, CNN senior political correspondent Candy Crowley reported on Inside Politics: "[T]he Kerry campaign points out there are Republicans here." Crowley also noted that the group's spokeswoman "is a Texas Republican who has contributed to the Bush campaign." On CNN's Crossfire, co-host James Carville also pointed to the Swift Boat Vets' Republican ties, as reported in Salon.com by Joe Conason in a May 4 article.
On MSNBC's Scarborough Country, host Joe Scarborough mentioned criticism of O'Neill's "dirty tricks" for the Nixon administration and asked if O'Neill was doing it again for the Bush campaign. MSNBC's Lester Holt Live showed a clip of Michael Meehan, Kerry presidential campaign adviser, criticizing the Swift Boat Veterans for their partisan attacks on Kerry and noting that a number of Kerry's crewmembers in Vietnam have praised his service. An afternoon report on MSNBC's daily news show, MSNBC Live, noted only that the Kerry campaign is "of course putting up veterans who disagree" with Kerry's critics. The broadcast omitted any information on individual members of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, whom the program identified as "a group of former Navy swift boat commanders and personnel many of whom served with Kerry in Vietnam."
FOX News Channel pushed harder on the credibility of some of the group's members. On several shows throughout the afternoon and evening, including Special Report with Brit Hume, FOX News Channel chief political correspondent Carl Cameron provided substantial background on some key Kerry critics. Cameron reported that the veterans held a news conference "essentially to trash [Kerry]" and that much of their criticism "dramatically conflicts with the public record." Cameron stated, "Senator Kerry has released most of his military records and for the most part, they are a glowing detail of his military service." Not only does their criticism conflict with what The New York Times described in an April 22 article as Kerry's "uniformly positive" evaluations included in his military records, but, as Cameron also reported, their criticism is inconsistent with statements previously made by many of the Swift Boat Vets themselves. Cameron reported that in 1968, Kerry critic Grant W. Hibbard,[1] a lieutenant commander in Vietnam during Kerry's tour:
... described Kerry in various favorable ways, as quote, "One of the top few in his willingness to seek and accept responsibility." Captain George Elliot, who served in Vietnam at the same time Kerry did, condemns Kerry now for touting his service in a war that Kerry later protested. ... But in '96, Elliot and other critics of today, praised him for going after the enemy.
Beyond pointing out the inconsistent statements by some of Kerry's critics, Cameron also reported that Democrats say that "many of them ... have become Republicans ... who have supported the Bush campaigns in Texas, have been close friends of the Bush family both in politics and business." Cameron stated on Special Report with Brit Hume, "The GOP says it's not involved with the veterans criticizing Kerry, but many of them are Republicans who have contributed to and backed various Bush campaigns and causes over the decades."
On FOX News Channel's Hannity & Colmes, co-host Alan Colmes challenged the credibility of the Swift Boat Vets. Colmes noted that Swift Boat Vets leader O'Neill did not serve in Vietnam with Kerry; rather, as O'Neill told Colmes, "I actually took his boat over, but about two months after he [Kerry] left." Colmes also draws attention to the flip-flopping nature of the comments made about Kerry by several group members. Colmes questioned O'Neill who appeared on the show:
Here is what Grant Hubbard [sic], who's now part of your group, here's what he had to say back then about John Kerry. And he signed -- let's put it up on the screen -- a report on Kerry. He said on initiative, one of the top few. Cooperation, one of the top few. Personal behavior, one of the top few. Why would he say that then and now be supporting you now?
Colmes further probed:
Let me show you the report of George Elliott, who also graded John Kerry in Vietnam. Here's what was said. Here's what he said. "In a combat environment often requiring independent, decisive action, Lieutenant Junior Grade Kerry was unsurpassed. LTJG Kerry emerges as the acknowledged leader in his peer group. His bearing and appearance are above reproach." That's a report of officer fitness from 1969 by George Elliott, who also graded Kerry. How do you account for that? Do you want to claim that everybody now is saying what you're saying? It's clearly not true.
Colmes went on to say to O'Neill, "You haven't explained to me how the very people who you claim are supporting you now had these superlative things to say about John Kerry back in the day when he was serving in Vietnam. I don't understand the discrepancy. Maybe you could explain it."
O'Neill answered by saying, "Sure. They were hardly superlative. If you look at John Kerry rated ... as a member of a group, you'll find that virtually everybody in the group got the same ones. Commander Hibbard, related generally, graded John Kerry as not observed. So you take that two or three items and ignored the not observed item on there."
Colmes replied, "[E]verything he did observe him on he was superlative."
O'Neill responded: "Yes, and mostly it was not observed."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes:
[1]During his April 19 MSNBC show Scarborough Country, former Florida Republican Representative Joe Scarborough referred to an April 14 Boston Globe story, from which he quoted the following: "John Kerry's much-heralded service medals are being questioned." Scarborough extensively quoted the Globe's interview with Kerry's commanding officer in Vietnam, Lieutenant Commander Grant Hibbard, who has questioned Kerry's first Purple Heart: "He [Hibbard] said -- quote -- 'He [Kerry] had a little scratch on his forearm. He was holding a piece of shrapnel. People in the office were saying, I don't think we got any fire.' And when asked about Kerry's medal, Grant said: 'Obviously, he got it, I don't know how.'"
Scarborough failed to mention the following facts from the Globe article: that Hibbard is a Republican and that "a review by the Globe of Kerry's war record ... found that the young Navy officer [Kerry] acted heroically under fire, in one case saving the life of an Army lieutenant."
In an April 14 Salon.com article, historian Douglas Brinkley debunked efforts to diminish Kerry's Vietnam record. Brinkley is the director of the Eisenhower Center for American Studies, a history professor at the University of New Orleans, and author of Tour of Duty: John Kerry and the Vietnam War.
— N.C.
Posted to the web on Wednesday May 5, 2004 at 7:05 PM EST
Copyright © 2004 Media Matters for America. All rights reserved. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Me#1You#10
Site Admin
Joined: 06 May 2004
Posts: 6503
|
| Posted: Sat May 15, 2004 6:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yada...smear job...yada...partisan hacks...yada...dirty tricksters...yada...Karl Rove...yada...yada...same old same old political counterpunching.
But one thing is quite evident in your article, and seems to be the overwhelming source of perplexion among the talking heads. The media (and perhaps most non-vets) needs some educating on the realities of Officer Efficiency Reports (I forget the Navy equivalent).
I recently read an apropos quip on the subject, either here or on another board.
"According to fitness reports, 90% of Naval Officers are in the top 10%".
Perhaps even the media might be led gently to this reality. Perhaps. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
